KRISHNAVENI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the wife of the detenu. The detenu, namely, Senthilmurugan was detained by the second respondent by his order in No.07 of 2016 dated 11.01.2016, holding him to be a "Goonda", as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982, taking note of the ground case in Crime No.513 of 2015 on the file of Chinnalapatty Police Station registered for offence punishable under Section 392 r/w 397 I.P.C.

(2.) The Detaining Authority, expressing subjective satisfaction that the detenu conformed to the definition of "Goonda" and that his presence at large would be prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and tranquillity and also expressing subjective satisfaction that it was very likely that the detenu would come out on bail in the ground case, passed the impugned detention order. The said order is challenged in the present Habeas Corpus Petition.

(3.) Though the order of detention is assailed on several grounds, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave of the Court to raise an additional ground and we permit the same. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the non -application of mind on the part of the Detaining Authority is apparent from the grounds of detention, wherein the subjective satisfaction of the Detaining Authority regarding the real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail in the ground case came to be expressed.